Bibliographic record
Abstract
The third major historical social movement in Latin America that we need to consider is that of community or neighbourhood associations, and placebased social movements more generally. From its origins, the labour movement always had a strong community presence, and workplace– community links were stronger than in the industrializing countries of the global North. The economic intergeneration of capitalist enterprises and various forms of self-employment and marginal enterprises in part explains this synergy. More broadly, as Joe Foweraker describes, “it is often a sense of neighbourhood that sustains urban social movements in Latin America. And that is created through intense networking and complex relations of exchange and reciprocity.” Solidarity in the workplace is matched by a communalism that sustains social relations, builds identity and forges a platform of common demands. In the periods of military rule, when there were interventions in labour unions and left-wing parties, the mass struggle could rely on a community base and bring in other allies, such as the churches and the human rights organizations. In contemporary Latin America there are many examples of place-based social movements, often lauded by NSM theorists who see them as exemplars of identity-based movements. Thus, Libia Grueso, Carlos Rosero and Arturo Escobar refer to Colombia's Pacific black movements as “a complex process of construction of ethnic and cultural identity in relation to novel variables such as territory, biodiversity, and alternative development”. Although most acknowledge the verve and dynamism of the Afro-Colombian place-based movements, we might also query whether territory is really a “novel” feature and whether these movements are harbingers of an alternative development model. Similar conceptual inflation occurred in Argentina in relation to the 2001/2 neighbourhood councils and barter economies set up to cope with the impact of economic collapse. The slogan “ Qué se vayan todos ” (“Let them all go”, referring to politicians) was itself a political refrain of the far left groups, and the neighbourhood organizing, though impressive, did not outlast elections and the return of a progressive Peronist government.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.268 | 0.081 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".